Effect of soybean fortification on Ghanaian fermented maize dough aroma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of soy fortification on the development of aroma compounds, dough acidity and growth of the predominant microorganisms were investigated in Ghanaian maize dough fermented spontaneously over a period of 72 h. The fortified maize dough was prepared from a milled mixture of soaked maize grains and pre-soaked, blanched and dehulled soybeans added at 20% replacement level. Extracts of volatiles from the soy-fortified and unfortified dough samples were obtained by Likens-Nickerson simultaneous distillation and extraction method analysed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-olfactometry (gas chromatography-sniffing). Major aroma compound groups identified in the fermented dough samples were carbonyls, alcohols, esters and volatile organic acids. Twenty-nine carbonyls were found in soy-fortified maize dough compared with 21 in the unfortified dough. Although the same alcohols were found in both dough samples, the total concentration of alcohols was slightly different, being less for the soy-fortified sample. Total concentration of esters in soy-fortified dough decreased after 72 h while levels in the unfortified dough increased. Increases in the production of lactic and acetic acids occurred in soy-fortified samples, but the maximum concentrations of acetic acid achieved did not differ significantly between the two types of dough. Twenty-three compounds were perceived to be contributing to the typical aroma of soy-fortified maize dough by the method of gas chromatography-sniffing. These included 12 carbonyls, six alcohols, two esters, two acids and one furan.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".